In this episode of The Editors, Rich, Charlie, and Luke delve into social-media’s banning Alex Jones, consider the Sarah Jeong affair, and mull over the implications of the recent Ohio special election.

Editors’ picks:
• Rich: Kevin Williamson on The Nation‘s poetry apology.
• Charlie: Jonah Goldberg’s G-File on Sarah Jeong.
• Luke: Graham Hillard’s “Long Live the Landline.”

More

You can access the full archive of The Editors at NationalReview.com/podcasts, where you can listen to four episodes per month for free, or get the entire back catalogue with an NR Plus membership. Visit NationalReview.com/subscribe for details.

Reihan, Luke, Charlie, and Michael discuss Trump’s poor Helsinki performance, debate the sustainability of Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez as a candidate, and make the case for more creative political representation on all sides.

Editors’ picks:
• Reihan: Alexandra’s piece on the battle for Virginia.
• Luke: Kevin’s laceration of bad Shakespeare performances.
• Charlie: Liam Warner on Ocasio-Cortez .
• MBD: Douglas Murray on Merkel and Europe.

More

You can access the full archive of The Editors at NationalReview.com/podcasts, where you can listen to four episodes per month for free, or get the entire back catalogue with an NR Plus membership. Visit NationalReview.com/subscribe for details.

Rich, Charlie, Michael, and Luke engage in a ‘principled critique of the Senate,’ discuss the Bill of Rights, and consider various other parts of the American system.

Editors’ picks:
• Rich: Calvin Coolidge Speech on the 150 Anniversary of the Declaration
• Luke: In the Event of Moon Disaster
• Charlie: Calvin Coolidge Gardner Letter  (scroll for letter)
• MBD: Frederick Douglass Decoration Day 1871 Speech

More

You can access the full archive of The Editors at NationalReview.com/podcasts, where you can listen to four episodes per month for free, or get the entire back catalogue with an NR Plus membership. Visit NationalReview.com/subscribe for details.

Rich, Charlie, Michael, and Luke discuss the latest SCOTUS decisions, the civility debate, and the most recent George Will column.

Editors’ picks:
• Rich: J.J. McCullough’s NRO piece on lying through photography.
• Luke: Kim Wins in Singapore by Nick Ebertsadt.
• Charlie: Book review: We Still Need Liberalism.
• MBD: Kevin Williamson’s piece about the border.

More

You can access the full archive of The Editors at NationalReview.com/podcasts, where you can listen to four episodes per month for free, or get the entire back catalogue with an NR Plus membership. Visit NationalReview.com/subscribe for details.

In this episode of Constitutionally Speaking, Jay and Luke continue their discussion of Jay’s new book, The Price of Greatness: Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and the Creation of American Oligarchy. Here, we see that Madison and Hamilton began to diverge over big policy ideas. Hamilton believed that his economic program was necessary for the prosperity, and ultimately the national security of the country. Madison, on the other hand, reckoned that Hamilton’s system was too favorable in how it treated the wealthy, and also worried that it facilitated political corruption.

More

Rich, Charlie, Luke, and Jonah discuss the current border situation, the recent IG report, and admissions issues at Harvard.

Editors’ picks:
• Rich: Eberstadt on North Korea from the new print issue.
• Charlie: Douglas Murray on the SPLC.
• Luke: J.J. McCullough on why James K. Polk was right to call for 54 40 or fight.
• Jonah: He is back writing for NR’s print issue after a hiatus writing his book Suicide of the West.

More

You can access the full archive of The Editors at NationalReview.com/podcasts, where you can listen to four episodes per month for free, or get the entire back catalogue with an NR Plus membership. Visit NationalReview.com/subscribe for details.

Rich, Reihan, and Luke discuss the president’s claim that he can pardon himself, the continuing debate over kneeling in the NFL, and the coming immigration fight in Congress.

Editors’ picks:
• Luke: Could Trump Pardon Himself?

More

You can access the full archive of The Editors at NationalReview.com/podcasts, where you can listen to four episodes per month for free, or get the entire back catalogue with an NR Plus membership. Visit NationalReview.com/subscribe for details.

In this episode of Constitutionally Speaking, Jay and Luke discuss Jay’s new book, The Price of Greatness: Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and the Creation of American Oligarchy. Jay’s book focuses on why these two great founding fathers and onetime allies became political enemies. He argues that it was because while they agreed on what was wrong with the Articles of Confederation, they had vast views of what should come next. Hamilton’s financial system was an ingenious way to spur national development, but it violated Madison’s conception of how a republic should function.

Recommended Readings:

More

In this episode of Constitutionally Speaking, Jay and Luke examine the first session of the First Congress, which met from the spring through the fall of 1789. One of the most productive legislative assemblies in American history, this session submitted the Bill of Rights to the states, created the first national tax, established the major cabinet departments, and began to set up the judiciary. At this early stage of the government, James Madison emerged as the key agent in Congress. While there is a broad consensus in favor of Federalism at this point, there are early indications of the coming ideological divisions that would define the 1790s.

Recommended Readings:

More

In this episode of Constitutionally Speaking, Jay and Luke discuss the first federal election, held in 1788-1789. In many parts of the country, the contests were a proxy over whether the new Constitution was a good plan of government. This was especially the case in Virginia, where Governor Patrick Henry schemed to keep James Madison out of Congress by pitting him against James Monroe in an Anti-Federalist district. But Henry miscalculated. Madison won a comfortable victory, and nationwide the pro-Constitution forces triumphed. This landmark victory for the Federalists would set the stage for the policies of the new government.

Recommended Readings:

More

Rich, Charlie, Michael Brendan Dougherty, and Luke Thompson discuss Mueller’s leaked questions, Marco Rubio’s criticism of the Republicans’ tax reform package, and Joy Reid’s time-traveling hacker.

Editors’ picks:
• Rich: Alfie Evans
• Luke: The Church of Grievance
• Charlie: How Much Does Hillary Clinton Drink?
• MBD: Risk and Business

More

You can access the full archive of The Editors at NationalReview.com/podcasts, where you can listen to four episodes per month for free, or get the entire back catalogue with an NR Plus membership. Visit NationalReview.com/subscribe for details.

In this episode of Constitutionally Speaking, Jay and Luke finish their discussion of the ratification debates with a look at Virginia and New York. Two of the most important states in the union, the Old Dominion and the Empire State were hardly enthusiastic supporters of the Constitution. In Virginia, major political figures like Richard Henry Lee, George Mason, and Patrick Henry opposed it, while the delegates at the convention were closely divided. In New York, Governor George Clinton and his political allies staunchly opposed it, and the ratification convention was dominated by Anti-Federalists. Ultimately, James Madison outmatched Henry in the Virginia convention in June 1788, narrowly securing ratification, which put enough pressure on New York to accede to the new government in July.

Recommended Readings:
George Mason, “Objections to the Constitution”
Virginia Ratifying Convention, “Proposed Amendments to the Constitution
James Madison to Alexander Hamilton, July 20, 1788

More

In this week’s episode of Constitutionally Speaking, Jay and Luke continue their discussion of ratification. First up, New Hampshire, the ninth state to ratify the Constitution, thereby making it the law of the land. But the Granite State only ratified after a substantial delay, so delegates could persuade their constituents to support it. North Carolina and Rhode Island held out until after the government already came into operation, with the latter state waiting until threat of extreme penalties from the federal government.

Recommended Readings:

More

Please Support Our Sponsor!

Reihan, Michael Brendan Dougherty, Luke Thompson, and Alexandra DeSanctis discuss the appointment of John Bolton as the new National Security Advisor, Chinese retaliation in the tariff war, and the legalization of marijuana.

Editors’ picks:

More

You can access the full archive of The Editors at NationalReview.com/podcasts, where you can listen to four episodes per month for free, or get the entire back catalogue with an NR Plus membership. Visit NationalReview.com/subscribe for details.

In this episode of Constitutionally Speaking, Jay and Luke continue their review of the ratifying conventions. The Federalists faced a stiff challenge in Massachusetts, despite the fact that its delegates supported the Constitution at the Constitutional Convention. Samuel Adams, John Hancock, and Elbridge Gerry all voiced skepticism. Ultimately a compromise was introduced: The Bay State would ratify the Constitution, with a series of recommended amendments. This helped ease the concerns of moderate Anti-Federalists and was integral to the eventual adoption of the document. Jay and Luke also discuss ratification in Maryland and South Carolina, where the Federalists won easy victories.

Recommended Readings:

More

Please Support Our Sponsor!

In this episode of Constitutionally Speaking, Jay and Luke begin their discussion of ratification. The early contests saw big victories for the Federalists, in Delaware, New Jersey, Georgia, Connecticut and Pennsylvania. With the exception of Pennsylvania, these were all small states with pressing needs for a stronger national government. Because the proposed Senate would protect their sovereignty, they ratified the Constitution quickly and eagerly. Pennsylvania, however, was a different story. Opposition to the Constitution in the west was strong, but slow to mobilize thanks to the “cram job” engineered by Philadelphia Federalists to ratify the Constitution before it had a full vetting. The Anti-Federalists responded by denouncing the ratifying convention after the fact, presaging the fierce battle to come in Massachusetts, New York, and Virginia.

Recommended Readings:

More

In this episode of Constitutionally Speaking, Jay and Luke finish their discussion of the Anti-Federalists by asking: What did they get right? The Bill of Rights is a great achievement, a kind of second governing charter adopted due to their opposition to the Constitution. More broadly, they advocated a vision of republican government, anchored to civic virtue and suspicious of outside, powerful elites, that would continue to shape the political debate for more than a century.

Recommended Readings:

More

In this episode of Constitutionally Speaking, Jay and Luke continue their discussion of the Anti-Federalists. One of the chief objections of the opponents of the Constitution was that it threatened to destroy republican government. The Anti-Federalists believed that the branches of the proposed system did not rely sufficiently on the people, but instead shifted power to the wealthy. Many of them believed that this was precisely the motivation of the Framers, to undo the Revolution of 1776 and replace it with a “higher toned” form of government. This Anti-Federal anxiety informed much of their efforts against the Constitution, and as Luke points out, also helps explain their advocacy for a Bill of Rights.

More

In this week’s episode of Constitutionally Speaking, Jay and Luke continue their discussion of the Anti-Federalists. While many agreed that the powers of the central government had to be expanded, they generally worried that adopting the Constitution was hasty, imprudent, and an overreaction to the problems of the day. Many of them argued that the Constitution was too complex to be properly understood. Patrick Henry, chief among them, warned that a constitution must be “like a beacon,” a clear signal of public purpose, and that the proposed document, with its complicated system of checks and balances, was inscrutable. Many Anti-Federalists also warned that the Constitution was the product of an aristocratic plot to undermine civic virtue, defraud the people of their rights, and turn the republic into a commercial and military empire.

Recommended Readings:

More
  1. 1
  2. 2